There won't be any answers to those good questions and most in the media won't ask anyway.

Only a Republican president would be raked over the coals for being so unprepared on the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack by radical Muslims. Democrats get a free pass and they try to put blame elsewhere to take the spotlight off themselves. That's why the media and Obama administration are busy trying to vilify the video maker so people will get mad at him for angering the radicals. Only a video would anger them, not the constant bragging of killing their idol.

Marine guards without guns and no security detail for the ambassador. Boy, they really valued him, didn't they?

Radicals were likely upset that the Dems were pressured by the public to change their platform to include God and acknowledging Jerusalem as Israel's capital. We all heard the roar of "boos" at that decision and we know the majority were royally pissed. Not to mention that the killing of bin laden was mentioned 21 times at the DNC convention and countless times before that. I think that helped fuel the anger for the planned attack on the 9/11 anniversary. But, the blame goes to some guy we never heard of who made a film no one saw.

The terrorists were well armed. They had a plan to enter embassy ground and commit the henious crimes. Others were waiting for the dead body of the ambassador to be paraded around town.

Odd how they always seem to have a large supply of American flags to burn. Where do they get them?

It is downright insulting for the liberal media to tell us these were some protesters upset about a video and they just got out of hand. They are gigantic idiots for believing that the American public are stupid enough to buy this line of crap. Maybe some Obama supporters will believe anything that is told to them, but those who pay attention and look at the whole picture just aren't buying it.

I think Obama should just apologize for what he's really sorry about and that is listening to the majority of Americans (who he is supposed to represent). Funny how they changed the platform at the convention due to public anger after it was reported that God would not be mentioned and that they were actually going to claim that Jerusalem wasn't the capital of one of our ally countries. Why did they have the original platform to begin with, specifically the anti-Semite aspect of it? It's becoming clear what the Democrat party is all about.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!